Feature Requests and Suggestions Thread

That would be FireFox 1.5 Beta 1. Amazingly enough, hacky IE doesn't seem to support any type of BLINK--not even within the "style" attribute. It's like stinky smelly homeless bum who doesn't believe in the 5 second rule.

So, this post is really annoying to you, is what you're saying? (For any lurkers who are not using Firefox: this paragraph is supposedly blinking.)(Edited to remove BLINK tags.)Do people actually do that? I mean, other than me (my middle name is "annoying"). But seriously, how can you consider Firefox "more advanced", when it dredges up long-discarded things like BLINK? I don't even know what BLINK looks like - unless I pull Firefox out of the recycle bin....Is it really necessary to disable BLINK? Or to put up signs saying "No Parking for Zeppelins"?This message has been edited by Ringo316, 2005-10-22 09:04 PM

---

People who think they have all the answers usually don't understand the questions.

Yes, people actually do that. Try Message 182. It doesn't actually blink, but only because AdminJar turned of the blinking blink.edit - added: It's the bold face all upper case text about 1/3 the way down.This message has been edited by nwr, 10-22-2005 02:53 PM

Wow. Giant leap backward.I did a Frankenstein on my Firefox just to see it. Never thought I'd see such a thing outside the Museum of Paleontology.Move ahead to the twentieth century, Firefox.

---

People who think they have all the answers usually don't understand the questions.

Firefox rocks. IE is crap...Sorry, just thought I'd represent.Have fun with your pop-ups, ads, alexa, tracker bots, activx, and general web non-conformity. This message has been edited by Yaro, 10-22-2005 04:47 PM

I actually think firefox is right to show the blinking.If people to create really horrible web pages, we should allow web surfers to see how really horrible they are. The browser should not be in the business of concealing it.

I never have trouble with those things - all easily sorted. And what fun is life without a little wildlife, anyway? Non-conformist? Moi? (How did you guess? )

---

People who think they have all the answers usually don't understand the questions.

I had never even seen a blink before today and I still see a lot of "really horrible" web pages. People can do "really horrible" things with fully compliant, "conformist" pages. There's no excuse for implementing a tag that has no redeeming qualities.

---

People who think they have all the answers usually don't understand the questions.

quote:

---

Firefox rocks. IE is crap...

---

I try not to get into the "my preferred platform/software is better than yours", but I have to say that I have used IE and...blecch.Still, I guess if someone likes it....

---

"Intellectually, scientifically, even artistically, fundamentalism -- biblical literalism -- is a road to nowhere, because it insists on fidelity to revealed truths that are not true." -- Katha Pollitt

per Adminnemooseus
EvC Forum: Dealing with waste of time threads and their posters... Note by edit from Adminnemooseus - At the above cited I posted: {Tweeked the link URL a bit - Link was and still is targeted at message 80. Changed the "m=79#80" part to "m=80#80". If the two numbers are not the same, the link may not work correctly for different member's page display setups. For example, if the above messages 79 and 80 weren't on the same page, there would be a problem. - Adminnemooseus}This message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 11-11-2005 11:32 AM

An idea to combat a member plastering the board with lots of micro-messages. Also to combat "dog pilling".Also, to help fight topic drift:
When a member clicks the "submit" button to post a new message, it opens a box asking the question Member clicks yes - New message gets posted.
Member clicks no - Back to the message creation form, for editing to happen.Adminnemooseus

Can we have some kind of standards for numbers and file sizes of pictures?There are a couple of threads now that have so many pictures in all the posts that even on DSL it takes a long time to download the thread.This makes it very frustrating to read the next post. I've tried reducing the number of posts shown to 5 to handle it, but it then becomes a different problem of continually reloading the next page to read more.Percy: can we have some kind of filter that takes picture links and saves a smaller file to use in the post when it is posted?Kind of like a large avatar that is then automatically linked to a larger picture (if necessary).This allows you to see the large picture when you want to but leave it just the avatar afterwards.This would also help to automatically reduce deep links to other sites

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

​

RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

Isn't your browser caching the photos so they're only downloaded once?

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

I usually clear all at end of day.

It might be useful to have a code for usernames. It could be similar to the "msg" code to identify messages. But, instead of generating a link to the message it would generate the name of the author of that message in the form of a link.One benefit is that, as users change their primary names by adding aliases, this code would enable you to always refer to the currently chosen primary name.

---

Impeach Bush.